Come on they used Austin because of its a cool city for their target market for the Alexa product. Amazon is not weaving some elaborate DaVinci Code here. They will announce news when they are ready to.

Austin has always been a long shot. They lack the international airport, and public transportation isn't great at all. Plus, Amazon moving to the city would make housing prices jump significantly taking away any sort of 'affordability' advantage they may have.

Whoever was in charge of making the advertisement has no idea what the higher ups are thinking for their HQ2. If anything, this was just thrown in there to generate more buzz about their new headquarters. I'm sure Amazon is loving all the publicity they have been getting thus far.

Can Amazon Take Dallas To The Big Leagues? Jeremiah Jensen, Bisnow Dallas, February 15, 2018

According to some predictions, Dallas is the most likely candidate for Amazon's breathlessly anticipated HQ2. About 50,000 jobs, an 8M SF campus and the sheer brand might of Amazon are bound to shake things up if Dallas does win the bid, but is it enough to take this city to the big leagues?...Putting aside industrial, which [Dallas] is a national top-tier market and enjoys a lot of attention from investors both foreign and domestic, market experts say Dallas is still in the process of maturing, and institutional capital has been avoiding large-scale moves in the market.

"Population growth is what we need to add momentum to the maturation process, Bruan said. Seitz said once population density hits critical mass in Downtown via residential development, it can start the final leg of its journey to global acclaim."

I've talked about it before on this forum but it seems like all those 900 hotels that have opened or are opening downtown aren't adding to all that supposed "vibrancy" we keep hearing about. I work downtown and 95% of hotel traffic is rushed off out-of-towners staring at their phones waiting for their ubers to arrive, or valet guys who don't get paid nearly enough to care about their jobs. If the residential population doesn't sizably increase, downtown will never be what it can be.

Also, I hate to break it to everyone on this thread, but Amazon is not coming here. Jeff Bezos is the richest man on planet earth with a company that just became the 3rd biggest company in the world by market cap, he's not going to move his headquarters to a city where the most influential people are 60 year old men whose lives revolve around high schoolers playing football and the average citizen equates to a provincial suburbanite whose most exciting life events are new menu items at Applebee's. You can have all the population and business growth you want, but at the end of the day DFW is hardly cosmopolitan besides a few pocket areas, and most of that forward thinking energy is driven by transplants, not the native population. Amazon will put their headquarters in the DC metro, I would almost bet everything I have on it. Jeff Bezos has the money and the revenue growth. He doesn't want tax incentives, he wants power and influence, which in America means Washington.

In the unlikely scenario that Amazon splits HQ2 between two cities (to take advantage of different incentives, lessen the impact on housing, etc.) they would probably have to be in the same state. Isn't Texas the only state with two separate metro areas on the list?

[quote="lakewoodhobo"]In the unlikely scenario that Amazon splits HQ2 between two cities (to take advantage of different incentives, lessen the impact on housing, etc.) they would probably have to be in the same state. Isn't Texas the only state with two separate metro areas on the list?[/

Depends how you look at DC. They have three different counties in their proposals. 2 of which I believe (could be wrong) are in Maryland

I really don't understand the DC talk at all... It does nothing to address the biggest problems with the current HQ (cost of living, work force availability, labor costs, property values, etc).Washington influence is critical, but that is the work of lobbyists. THEY are the ones who should be in DC. The decision makers in Washington don't give two sh*t's about economic development in the DC area, and having these folks working there does nothing to advance Amazon's interests. Unless you do federal government work, it makes very little sense economically as a company to exist in DC.In fact... Saving $$$ (which Amazon is great at) by not wasting it an excessive HQ's, frees up capital to throw at lobbyists. Just my opinion... of course.

hjkll wrote:Also, I hate to break it to everyone on this thread, but Amazon is not coming here. Jeff Bezos is the richest man on planet earth with a company that just became the 3rd biggest company in the world by market cap, he's not going to move his headquarters to a city where the most influential people are 60 year old men whose lives revolve around high schoolers playing football and the average citizen equates to a provincial suburbanite whose most exciting life events are new menu items at Applebee's. You can have all the population and business growth you want, but at the end of the day DFW is hardly cosmopolitan besides a few pocket areas, and most of that forward thinking energy is driven by transplants, not the native population. Amazon will put their headquarters in the DC metro, I would almost bet everything I have on it. Jeff Bezos has the money and the revenue growth. He doesn't want tax incentives, he wants power and influence, which in America means Washington.

Cute rant. The man who invented the microchip was one of those Dallasites you look down upon so much. So you might want to calm yourself.

I think the bisnow guy said Dallas didn't offer a site meeting all Amazon's requests is the Victory Park - West End submission tallied less acreage than the RFP mentioned, and perhaps the current weak rail flow. I also think the acreage parameter is dynamic; geography is flexible if the building are taller with more floor space something like that.

Dart's light rail choke point in the CBD will be addressed by the time HQ2 hiring is in full swing --- and that's about the time Dart and all the other North Texas transit agencies should have combined forces with a single regional plan.

And Amazon included city-building aspiration in this dealio. What Dallas (area) lacks, tier one university, more degreed millenieals and better public transport are all items HQ2 would help build into North Texas. With three public universities advancing toward tier one status, two private universities progressively improving academic delivery and UTSW already performing at a tier one level, a big high profile presence from Amazon is the likely catalyst for the three public universities to get more help advancing, SMU and TCU would certainly join the fun.

Getting from downtown Plano/Frisco to downtown Dallas would become so important that rail transit parallel to the Dallas North Tollway would happen.

hjkll wrote:Also, I hate to break it to everyone on this thread, but Amazon is not coming here. Jeff Bezos is the richest man on planet earth with a company that just became the 3rd biggest company in the world by market cap, he's not going to move his headquarters to a city where the most influential people are 60 year old men whose lives revolve around high schoolers playing football and the average citizen equates to a provincial suburbanite whose most exciting life events are new menu items at Applebee's. You can have all the population and business growth you want, but at the end of the day DFW is hardly cosmopolitan besides a few pocket areas, and most of that forward thinking energy is driven by transplants, not the native population. Amazon will put their headquarters in the DC metro, I would almost bet everything I have on it. Jeff Bezos has the money and the revenue growth. He doesn't want tax incentives, he wants power and influence, which in America means Washington.

Cute rant. The man who invented the microchip was one of those Dallasites you look down upon so much. So you might want to calm yourself.

I'm not going to disagree with much of the sentiment in that one.... but I'll add to the quiet brilliance of things coming out of the province of Dallas.... Casual dining restaurants like Applebee's were perfected in Dallas, figuring out what suburbia wants and delivering it in a prepackaged template to spread fast over the land is pretty innovative.

Suburban shopping malls were perfected in Dallas, the vintage ones like Highland Park Village and NorthPark as well as the contemporary ones like Shops at Legacy....

As painfully slow/difficult/mutable as Dallas City politics can seem, the municipal investment strategy has been able to transform a dead-by-suicide Central Business District and adjacent collapsing neighborhoods into the foundation of a great city; the bisnow guy identified this (public-private) kick-start to be what Dallas has needed on "its journey to global acclaim."

Nothing so cosmopolitan about good plans like that, but it sure has paid off, and it's going to keep paying off.

Matt777 wrote:Cute rant. The man who invented the microchip was one of those Dallasites you look down upon so much. So you might want to calm yourself.

Yeah lol seriously. If someone hates Dallas so much, they should probably move rather than write up epic rants on the internets. They’ll be much happier.

One of the reasons I don’t live in Dallas is that I’m a snob about urban environments. And by not living there, I can be happy and excited when my hometown makes improvements rather than perpetually annoyed that it still has a ways to go. It’s a much better way to live your life.

tanzoak wrote:One of the reasons I don’t live in Dallas is that I’m a snob about urban environments. And by not living there, I can be happy and excited when my hometown makes improvements rather than perpetually annoyed that it still has a ways to go. It’s a much better way to live your life.

hahahaha

Sharing the urban environment snobbery, I, instead, moved to the near country- a small declining neighborhood next to a state conservation park; an almost rural bubble, beautifully wooded, in a larger community struggling to let go of the past and accept it's role as the suburban edge of a rapidly growing Metro. It's going to get too crowded one of these days and I'll have to go all countryside or, I don't, maybe Los Angeles. San Francisco is too cold, Northeast out of the question.

I think you are all forgetting the huge development potential spots for an HQ2 along the Trinity owned by Matthews southwest which is right where the high speed rail terminal will be.

Not only that, the NCTCOG also just announced the building of water gardens all throughout that area along with finally investments in the levees to lower them while also addressing their needed improvements. Then there is the Trinity River park which is moving forward now that the Tollroad is finally dead and has been turned over to a public/ private entity.

That huge development area aside, there is also the Smart District for the parking lots and land just south of city hall that also meets the RFP and is being positioned as such.

While the Victory park development proposal isnt bad itself, and has a huge advantage of being run by people who have EXTENSIVE work relations with Amazon and Bezos, I think the Matthews Southwest and Smart District areas are the locations are better spots.

lakewoodhobo wrote:In the unlikely scenario that Amazon splits HQ2 between two cities (to take advantage of different incentives, lessen the impact on housing, etc.) they would probably have to be in the same state. Isn't Texas the only state with two separate metro areas on the list?

IF they split HQ2 between two cities, why would they have to be in the same state? What advantage would there be to having two in the same state?

tamtagon wrote:With three public universities advancing toward tier one status, two private universities progressively improving academic delivery and UTSW already performing at a tier one level, a big high profile presence from Amazon is the likely catalyst for the three public universities to get more help advancing, SMU and TCU would certainly join the fun.

There's a lot of misconception about this. I happen to know a lot about this subject, how rankings are determined and what factors go into determining tier 1 status..etc.

I'd also like mention that the DMN published a story today about how DFW doesn't have a "true Tier 1" university...

Pure drivel.

Let me first start with this, the rankings are determined by the Carnegie foundation. These rankings are NOT supposed to be what determines which schools are better than others (although in academia; they often ignore this; everyone wants this status). This is explicitly stated by Carnegie, so we cannot say "oh, you're not tier 1 - bad school!"..

The reality is there are weightings of several factors. Among them R&D funds allocated to Science and Engineering and Non Science and Engineering. Also doctorate degrees conferred in many areas ; the most important (per Carnegie's weightings) being STEM doctorates.

However, the allocation of research expenditures is heavily skewed among American universities ( a problem - but that's another debate)...so only a small percentage of the schools receive the bulk of research expenditures.

That's why the Carnegie rankings take per capita into consideration..

And guess what... UNT, UTD,UT Arlington..put in work. Thats why they are R1. As published by the latest 2015 Carnegie rankings. There's no "true" R1 designation that the DMN is moaning about.

It's very insulting to the staff and the The students who put in long hours researching and studying not to be respected by the publication that covers your region.

These local universities are producing enough students to support a growing region. And are consciousness of how they allocate their resources. They are R1 - whether your local paper recognizes/respects it or not.

I also have a lot of experience here. DMN is right. UTD is trying really hard right now to become Tier 1 but they are thinking a decade into the future in terms of having a global impact. Aside from UTSW, which is not an undergraduate institution, Dallas doesn’t have Tier 1 research universities. Texas, in fact, probably only has three: UT, A&M, and Rice.

I don’t think we’ve satisfactorily established that this matter of Tier 1 / R1 pipeline (with or without grade inflation on the definition in the years since 1994*) even matters for cities’ real value proposition to AMZN.Especially when compared to the myriad cultural opportunities to get Amazon employees intermarried with federal employees at every level, not to mention in bed with the overall policy mindset — and potentially find any possible means to reduce the likelihood of, postpone, or hedge their corporate bets against Bezos’ empire getting broken up — which would each come with headquartering Inside The Beltway, and not with the seventeen cities bidding from afar.

Edit:USG and AMZN are not the only parties that would set the new tone I’m talking about. For instance, the long-term Washington establishment outside the government has a range of pretty strong effects on shaping the background social norms at play day to day there too. It’s pretty stinkin’ obvious that those folks would be thrilled and eternally grateful to join the global ranks of innovative business capitals. The only Fortune 100 feathers in the cap of Maryland, Virginia, *or* DC are ones that just don’t have much choice about their location: Fannie, Freddie, and Lockheed, plus good ole General Dynamics. Not exactly votes of confidence that the place is arriving... Bezos could amp up that confidence and there’d be no mistaking what the causality was.

* Not to send us down the R1 rabbit hole, but I’ve crunched my own numbers from the National Science Foundation public data on this question and can PM anyone who’s intrigued.

Waldozer wrote:I also have a lot of experience here. DMN is right. UTD is trying really hard right now to become Tier 1 but they are thinking a decade into the future in terms of having a global impact. Aside from UTSW, which is not an undergraduate institution, Dallas doesn’t have Tier 1 research universities. Texas, in fact, probably only has three: UT, A&M, and Rice.

I don't know why all of you are arguing about these designations. The higher ed situation in DFW puts us at a disadvantage compared to the other top-tier competition, regardless. That's not saying that our unis are worthless, but compared to Boston/DC/Philly/Chicago/NYC/etc, we are at a clear disadvantage in that area.

tanzoak wrote:I don't know why all of you are arguing about these designations. The higher ed situation in DFW puts us at a disadvantage compared to the other top-tier competition, regardless. That's not saying that our unis are worthless, but compared to Boston/DC/Philly/Chicago/NYC/etc, we are at a clear disadvantage in that area.

We're Not arguing; just discussing. But I do find it interesting that this notion that DFW doesn't have a R1 university is well engrained. It's really not true.

With that said; I would argue the California University system would provide better talent for Amazon than say DC or NY.

With that said, I think one should compare DFW to Seattle. Compare what that metro has in terms of educated workforce and what Dallas has to offer.

That will give a better idea if Dallas is even a viable option.

But if it does come down to education and NY and DC are the last two remaining; this whole competition will really look like a farce.. they really didn't have to do all this if they already had an idea where the schools are.

Yeah, UTD likes to tout the Carnegie metric and in the same breath refers to it as a milestone on their journey to Tier 1 status. Ergo, they freely admit they aren’t there yet, by their own metrics. Carnegie’s metrics, which include Texas Tech and UNT as Tier 1, are part of the “grade inflation” someone else here referred to.

I believe that of the finalist cities DFW and Austin are the only ones without a Top 50 University in the US News and World Report ranking. Not stellar for us but Seattle is in the same boat with UW at #56 and clearly Amazon was able to grow there.

I think the collegiate potency of any population center has far more impact and influence on the quality and variety of life than the appeal to relocating corporations. Amazon has 20 places in the tournament, and most or all will no difficulty importing people to work at HQ2; the same goes for any big company opening a big new office. The ten metros with the ten 'best' collections of higher education are in the business of exporting graduates... you go to Harvard or MIT so you can get a job anywhere, not so you can stay in New England.

It's a big deal to have local universities producing qualified employees, but that's certainly not the only source. Anyway, what I like about the tier discussion is the awareness that North Texas has three public universities likely to be on the Best Of list in the future, they've all made improvements. TCU and SMU have done very well, too. As a place to live, North Texas absolutely must ensure the industry of education continues to grow. (also need to copy this tangent to the appropriate thread)

By some measures, higher education is Dallas’ great weakness in the Amazon sweepstakes.

The region still doesn’t have a true Tier One research university, which is a staple in most major metro areas. It’s also a laggard in educational attainment.

Just over 1 in 3 millennials in North Texas have a college degree, which ranks next to last among the metros selected as finalists for Amazon’s next headquarters....On the outside were Los Angeles, Dallas-Fort Worth (47th) and Miami....Fortunately for Dallas, other trends paint a stronger picture of higher education here. The region is producing many more college graduates, especially in technology. And Dallas has become a top magnet for educated workers, thanks to a strong economy and affordable cost of living.

The region's growth rate outpaced the nation's and many rival metros. Atlanta, for instance, added almost 59,000 college-educated millennials in the last decade. D-FW added twice as many over the same period, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

“What Dallas has working in its favor is the ability to attract talent from outside the region,” said Colin Yasukochi, director of research and analysis for CBRE, which produces an annual report on tech talent in North America.

In the 2017 report, D-FW ranked second for “brain gain,” behind only the San Francisco Bay area. That metric is the difference between the number of tech degrees awarded and tech jobs created.

Among the finalists for Amazon HQ2, Dallas led with a brain gain of over 22,000. Boston and Washington, which are leaders in college degrees, lost thousands of graduates to other cities.

Yasukochi wouldn’t discuss specific companies, including Amazon, but said this trend can be argued two ways. Boston can say that it has ample talent for growing companies, and Dallas can point to its record of producing more graduates and pulling in outsiders.

“You don’t have to educate all the talent that companies are seeking to hire,” Yasukochi said. “If you have an environment that attracts people to move to your area, that can be a tremendous advantage.”...But the total number of such workers, not just percentages, make a difference, too. That’s particularly true with HQ2 because it’s hiring so many.

In 2016, D-FW had almost 377,000 millennials with a college degree. That’s far more than Raleigh (91,000), Austin (163,000) and Columbus (129,000).

Dallas has a similar size advantage on specific tech jobs. It has twice as many application software developers as Austin and three times more than Raleigh, according to Joshua Wright of Emsi....But Dallas has some underappreciated strengths, especially in diversity, said Frey of the Brookings Institution. In a separate report, he examined where millennials were gathering.

From 2010 to 2015, Dallas ranked among the leading metros in attracting young adults who were black (41,000), white (32,000) and Asian (27,000). He believes that Amazon will emphasize diversity in the HQ2 decision and that Dallas can make a compelling case.

“It’s a big, growing, diverse city that’s attracting a lot of millennials, and it’s improving on educational attainment,” Frey said.

Landing Amazon would accelerate advances in education because the company would invest money and effort into improving the community.

“Dallas already has a good profile, and Amazon would make it even better," he said.

Wow, that article has it exactly backwards. A place that has more tech grads than tech jobs is a benefit, not a detriment, and vice versa.

The point is that you want a high-quality workforce without having to compete too hard for them. A net importing of entry-level tech workforce means that the supply of workers produced by local universities isn’t enough to meet the demand of existing employers, much less with the addition of your giant HQ2 operation.

Don’t get me wrong, its a good thing for the region that tech employment is outperforming locally-grown supply. But it’s a negative factor for a company competing in that space contemplating a relocation (or major expansion in this case).

PonyUp13 wrote:I believe that of the finalist cities DFW and Austin are the only ones without a Top 50 University in the US News and World Report ranking. Not stellar for us but Seattle is in the same boat with UW at #56 and clearly Amazon was able to grow there.

PonyUp13 wrote:I believe that of the finalist cities DFW and Austin are the only ones without a Top 50 University in the US News and World Report ranking. Not stellar for us but Seattle is in the same boat with UW at #56 and clearly Amazon was able to grow there.

PonyUp13 wrote:I believe that of the finalist cities DFW and Austin are the only ones without a Top 50 University in the US News and World Report ranking. Not stellar for us but Seattle is in the same boat with UW at #56 and clearly Amazon was able to grow there.

OMG, I am not going to read another article on this Amazon HQ until Amazon makes a press release. The press is just short of reading tea leaves and asking Ms. Cleo to predict the future. Next time they are going to hold a hamster race and label them by city and the winner must be the winning city!

I wonder if Atlanta is out of the running because of this Delta/NRA situation and if this will alter how Amazon feels about choosing any red state? (Of course, if they've really already decided on DC, then it's a moot point).http://www.businessinsider.com/georgia- ... erm=mobile